Tax Reform ATR believes that all consumed income should be taxed one time, at one low and flat rate. Link
Jay Old Leaves the Door Open to Tax Hikes http://t.co/A2qdFjUf
taxreformer
CoGC: Nanny State Update: Leaf Blower Bans and Mascot Crackdowns http://t.co/B0XpLd72
taxreformer
ATR Releases 2012 List of State Taxpayer Protection Pledge Signers in the Texas Primary http://t.co/GBXDf6M5
taxreformer
Key Issues Pending in LA with One Week Left in 2012 Session http://t.co/2DDDPdEi
taxreformer
RT @AAF: We are happy to announce our new lighter twitter handle @AAF. Help us spread the word with a RT.
taxreformer
RT @AAN: We are happy to announce our new lighter twitter handle @AAN. Help us spread the word with a RT.
taxreformer
Just the Facts on Big Spending http://t.co/P3pj3ZN0
taxreformer
Jim Pendergraph Supports $2 Trillion Tax Hike http://t.co/LF6ieJuZ
taxreformer
Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley: Barack Obama, Jr. http://t.co/lzrcRtSj
taxreformer
EPA's War on Fossil Fuels http://t.co/gzORlViU
taxreformer
Dear Senator Inhofe:
On behalf of Americans for Tax Reform, and millions of taxpayers, I would like to thank you for your report titled Consensus Exposed: The CRU controversy, which formally requested the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reconsider its endangerment finding on the basis that they relied on the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports, which have now been revealed to be full of faulty science.
Your response to the EPA’s endangerment findings is wholly appropriate given the de-legitimization of the once esteemed University of East Anglia‘s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), and subsequently, the United Nation’s IPCC reports, many of which were authored by CRU scientists or drew heavily from CRU findings.
Unable to pass comprehensive climate legislation through Congress, members of the current administration have attempted to shape American energy policy via the EPA, a contentious point your report confronts head on. Questioning the EPA’s authority to implement broad energy regulation while challenging the justification for such regulation, your thorough report rebuts EPA’s most convincing arguments.
This refutation of the EPA is critical because of the enormous impact EPA regulation or cap-and-trade like legislation would have on American people and American businesses. The EPA should not be the chief regulator of America’s economy.
The effect of suggested energy taxes would be devastating; resulting in lost income, lost jobs, and higher energy prices. Energy taxes deter foreign investment negatively impacting future growth. In order to compensate for higher energy prices, American companies would be forced to raise the price of their products, reduce their payroll, or ship jobs overseas. Higher energy prices directly affect consumers as Americans will see their energy bills soar. None of these results are desirable.
I would like to commend your efforts in standing up for taxpayers, small businesses, consumers and American family’s nationwide. Thank you for your leadership.
Onward,
Grover G. Norquist
GGH/bmj
Cc: All Members of the US Senate
Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator